Comments on: The Need for a New Knowledge Area http://pmstudent.com/the-pmi-pmbok-needs-a-new-knowledge-area/ Helping new and aspiring project managers reach their career goals! Wed, 23 May 2012 19:32:26 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Opportunity Management Part Deux http://pmstudent.com/the-pmi-pmbok-needs-a-new-knowledge-area/#comment-45045 Opportunity Management Part Deux Sat, 11 Jun 2011 02:07:15 +0000 http://pmstudent.com/?p=1049#comment-45045 [...] to PM, PMP tips, and subscribe for updates!Powered by WP Greet Box WordPress PluginGlen B. Alleman left a great comment with a link to an article refuting the need for Opportunity Management (OM). I have reviewed the [...] [...] to PM, PMP tips, and subscribe for updates!Powered by WP Greet Box WordPress PluginGlen B. Alleman left a great comment with a link to an article refuting the need for Opportunity Management (OM). I have reviewed the [...]

]]> By: Dr. Paul D. Giammalvo http://pmstudent.com/the-pmi-pmbok-needs-a-new-knowledge-area/#comment-3953 Dr. Paul D. Giammalvo Sun, 07 Dec 2008 02:02:23 +0000 http://pmstudent.com/?p=1049#comment-3953 Hi Glenn, Thanks for this reference. I had not read Conrow before. But getting back to the thread, not sure if I missed something, but isn't Conrow saying the same thing I did? That an effective risk management process addresses both the threat and the opportunity? (And I did not mean to imply that each threat had a "mirror image" opportunity) In my classes, I start the process of risk analysis applying brainstorming techniques to create a force field analysis. (I apply this to each element of the WBS) As an aside, has anyone noticed that many of the tools used in quality analysis are also the same as those used in risk as well? As another aside,being a fan of activity based management, I tend to embed or "bundle" risk, quality, time, resources and cost into each WBS element and eventually into each activity. Does anyone else take this approach? BR, Dr. PDG, Jakarta Hi Glenn,
Thanks for this reference. I had not read Conrow before.

But getting back to the thread, not sure if I missed something, but isn’t Conrow saying the same thing I did? That an effective risk management process addresses both the threat and the opportunity? (And I did not mean to imply that each threat had a “mirror image” opportunity)

In my classes, I start the process of risk analysis applying brainstorming techniques to create a force field analysis. (I apply this to each element of the WBS)

As an aside, has anyone noticed that many of the tools used in quality analysis are also the same as those used in risk as well?

As another aside,being a fan of activity based management, I tend to embed or “bundle” risk, quality, time, resources and cost into each WBS element and eventually into each activity. Does anyone else take this approach?

BR,
Dr. PDG, Jakarta

]]> By: Dr. Paul D. Giammalvo http://pmstudent.com/the-pmi-pmbok-needs-a-new-knowledge-area/#comment-24497 Dr. Paul D. Giammalvo Sun, 07 Dec 2008 02:02:00 +0000 http://pmstudent.com/?p=1049#comment-24497 Hi Glenn, Thanks for this reference. I had not read Conrow before. But getting back to the thread, not sure if I missed something, but isn't Conrow saying the same thing I did? That an effective risk management process addresses both the threat and the opportunity? (And I did not mean to imply that each threat had a "mirror image" opportunity) In my classes, I start the process of risk analysis applying brainstorming techniques to create a force field analysis. (I apply this to each element of the WBS) As an aside, has anyone noticed that many of the tools used in quality analysis are also the same as those used in risk as well? As another aside,being a fan of activity based management, I tend to embed or "bundle" risk, quality, time, resources and cost into each WBS element and eventually into each activity. Does anyone else take this approach? BR, Dr. PDG, Jakarta Hi Glenn,
Thanks for this reference. I had not read Conrow before.

But getting back to the thread, not sure if I missed something, but isn’t Conrow saying the same thing I did? That an effective risk management process addresses both the threat and the opportunity? (And I did not mean to imply that each threat had a “mirror image” opportunity)

In my classes, I start the process of risk analysis applying brainstorming techniques to create a force field analysis. (I apply this to each element of the WBS)

As an aside, has anyone noticed that many of the tools used in quality analysis are also the same as those used in risk as well?

As another aside,being a fan of activity based management, I tend to embed or “bundle” risk, quality, time, resources and cost into each WBS element and eventually into each activity. Does anyone else take this approach?

BR,
Dr. PDG, Jakarta

]]> By: Glen B. Alleman http://pmstudent.com/the-pmi-pmbok-needs-a-new-knowledge-area/#comment-3940 Glen B. Alleman Sat, 06 Dec 2008 15:56:23 +0000 http://pmstudent.com/?p=1049#comment-3940 Paul, Regarding Risk and Opportunity, read Dr. Edmund Conrows article in the March/April Defense Acquisition and Technology journal. https://acc.dau.mil/CommunityBrowser.aspx?id=194306&lang=en-US. When you get to the page that asks for certificate invalid just say proceed. All US DoD web site do this. As well Ed's book, Effective Risk Management: Some Keys to Success, is mandatory reading in the Aerospace and Defense world. Many of the risk and oppotunity discussion are formed around dictionary definitions of "risk" and "opportunity," The quantative aspects of mixing these two approaches in ignored. To the riks of the program. Paul,
Regarding Risk and Opportunity, read Dr. Edmund Conrows article in the March/April Defense Acquisition and Technology journal.
https://acc.dau.mil/CommunityBrowser.aspx?id=194306&lang=en-US.
When you get to the page that asks for certificate invalid just say proceed. All US DoD web site do this.
As well Ed’s book, Effective Risk Management: Some Keys to Success, is mandatory reading in the Aerospace and Defense world.
Many of the risk and oppotunity discussion are formed around dictionary definitions of “risk” and “opportunity,” The quantative aspects of mixing these two approaches in ignored. To the riks of the program.

]]> By: Glen B. Alleman http://pmstudent.com/the-pmi-pmbok-needs-a-new-knowledge-area/#comment-24496 Glen B. Alleman Sat, 06 Dec 2008 15:56:00 +0000 http://pmstudent.com/?p=1049#comment-24496 Paul, Regarding Risk and Opportunity, read Dr. Edmund Conrows article in the March/April Defense Acquisition and Technology journal. https://acc.dau.mil/CommunityBrowser.aspx?id=194306&lang=en-US. When you get to the page that asks for certificate invalid just say proceed. All US DoD web site do this. As well Ed's book, Effective Risk Management: Some Keys to Success, is mandatory reading in the Aerospace and Defense world. Many of the risk and oppotunity discussion are formed around dictionary definitions of "risk" and "opportunity," The quantative aspects of mixing these two approaches in ignored. To the riks of the program. Paul,
Regarding Risk and Opportunity, read Dr. Edmund Conrows article in the March/April Defense Acquisition and Technology journal.
https://acc.dau.mil/CommunityBrowser.aspx?id=194306&lang=en-US.
When you get to the page that asks for certificate invalid just say proceed. All US DoD web site do this.
As well Ed’s book, Effective Risk Management: Some Keys to Success, is mandatory reading in the Aerospace and Defense world.
Many of the risk and oppotunity discussion are formed around dictionary definitions of “risk” and “opportunity,” The quantative aspects of mixing these two approaches in ignored. To the riks of the program.

]]> By: Dr. Paul D. Giammalvo http://pmstudent.com/the-pmi-pmbok-needs-a-new-knowledge-area/#comment-3904 Dr. Paul D. Giammalvo Fri, 05 Dec 2008 13:05:56 +0000 http://pmstudent.com/?p=1049#comment-3904 Hi Bill, To answer your questions directed to me: 1) THIS asapm competency credential http://www.pmcert.org/Prog_Overview.asp . Isn't asapm the IPMA representative in the USA? Isn't IPMA's multi-level credentialing system advertised as being competency based? (I recognize that not everyone agrees it truly IS competency based) But at least it does require a 360 degree assessment AND submission of evidence backing up the claims. 2) "Best Practices"- I don't disagree with anything you have said. The reason I am pushing for "best practices" has to do with the professionalization of what it is we do for a living. IF we want to professionalize the practice of project management, then we MUST move beyond MPMT. Now, at least in construction, one of the standard clauses we find in AIA, AGC and EJCDC standardized contracts is "best practices of the trades" which a legal term with legal definitions and legal consequences for not following them. Are they actually written down? Obviously not, but one of the questions always asked by expert witnesses is whether or not what was done represented a "best practice" and through years of case law, this has been fairly well defined. (Not perfectly, and there are now and probably always will be grey areas, but substantially, yes) AACE has addressed this by publishing RECOMMENDED practices, which they have put into the "public domain" under their copyright, but have done so at no cost. http://www.aacei.org/technical/rp.shtml Notice that "recommended" practices are a far cry from MPMT, and I can say from first hand experience that courts of law will accept them, when presented through the testimony of an expert witness as being "best" practices. BR, Dr. PDG, Jakarta Hi Bill,
To answer your questions directed to me:

1) THIS asapm competency credential http://www.pmcert.org/Prog_Overview.asp . Isn’t asapm the IPMA representative in the USA? Isn’t IPMA’s multi-level credentialing system advertised as being competency based? (I recognize that not everyone agrees it truly IS competency based) But at least it does require a 360 degree assessment AND submission of evidence backing up the claims.

2) “Best Practices”- I don’t disagree with anything you have said. The reason I am pushing for “best practices” has to do with the professionalization of what it is we do for a living. IF we want to professionalize the practice of project management, then we MUST move beyond MPMT.

Now, at least in construction, one of the standard clauses we find in AIA, AGC and EJCDC standardized contracts is “best practices of the trades” which a legal term with legal definitions and legal consequences for not following them. Are they actually written down? Obviously not, but one of the questions always asked by expert witnesses is whether or not what was done represented a “best practice” and through years of case law, this has been fairly well defined. (Not perfectly, and there are now and probably always will be grey areas, but substantially, yes)

AACE has addressed this by publishing RECOMMENDED practices, which they have put into the “public domain” under their copyright, but have done so at no cost. http://www.aacei.org/technical/rp.shtml

Notice that “recommended” practices are a far cry from MPMT, and I can say from first hand experience that courts of law will accept them, when presented through the testimony of an expert witness as being “best” practices.

BR,
Dr. PDG, Jakarta

]]>